My mate Greg Mulholland has raised the English question during a debate on the Conservative's proposed boundary changes:
I accept that the Bill is not the right place to deal with the next issue that I want to raise, but it must be addressed. The missing bit of devolution-the English question-is not in the Bill. I am pleased that the Deputy Prime Minister suggested that it would be considered. That must happen, because the English are currently represented only by MPs whereas the Welsh and the Scots have Members of the Scottish Parliament and Welsh Assembly Members. The matter must be tackled so that the English are no longer the poor relations.
Well done to Greg. And he's right. Although most of the complaining is predictably coming from outside England, it is England where the reduction in representation will be felt most acutely because among the nations of Britain it is only England that does not have additional representation provided to its people by politicians elected to its own national parliament.
Cretins like Peter Hain complain that Wales will lose 25% of its Westminster MPs due to this boundary change (compared to England's 7% reduction in MPs). Good. The Welsh have their 60 Assembly Members to represent them on devolved issues, so frankly who cares? Where Tango man does have a valid point, I think, is in his complaint that Scottish Lib Dem constituencies have been excluded from this reform:
In Wales the impact will be most savage of all. Wales will lose three times the proportion of MPs as the average for the UK: a reduction of fully a quarter, from 40 to 30. Whereas in Scotland, three geographically large, Liberal-held constituencies are conveniently excluded from the reform, in mid- and west Wales where there are many thousands more sheep than people, four geographically large seats will become two monster ones. Former coal-mining seats will be merged, forgetting the elementary verity of the Welsh valleys – that you cannot communicate with the next Valley by the shortest route (over the top of the mountain), you have to travel either to the top or bottom and go right around.
I wonder why Greg didn't raise that question; why didn't he ask why Scotland should still be over-represented at Westminster, even though it has its own legislative parliament?
Well worth a read is 'Concern mounts over plan to cut number of MPs' in the Western Mail. It shows how Peter Hain and the Welsh Labour Party are really bricking it over these proposed reforms. Increasing Westminster's "Englishness" by disproportionately reducing Scottish and Welsh representation at Westminster, will reduce non-English influence in the governance of the UK and will weaken the Union. It is a reform that English nationalists should support, if only because it makes England even more electorally important for all three main parties.
